Western Star

6 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

... there seems to be no evidence of the RHES DCIX being adopted at that time on other wagons...  I suspect 10995 probably remained unique.

I spoke with Chris this evening about the research done on GWR 4-Plank Open wagons built circa 1900-1904 and he has provided details of the brake arrangements for Lot 374, wagon no. 10995 was built on this Lot.  The registers show the brake arrangements of wagons built on Lot 374, there are three different annotations used for this Lot, as:-

* "double brake" or "lever, double"  or "lever" which appears to be two brake blocks and a single handbrake lever;

* "new lever" - which we think is probably DC1;

* "right hand new lever" - which is DC1X on the basis of the evidence of the photographs posted here by Dave.

Lot 374 for 123 wagons was built April 1902 to July 1902.  Chris has summarised the brake details from the register entries as :-  62 Lever (50%), 23 New lever (19%) and 38 Right Hand New lever (31%).

What is not clear to us at this time is just which wagons of Lot 374 were given cast plates - or if the fitting of plates was restricted to wagons with the same arrangement of barake gear.

Inspection of the registers and tabulation of the information was done by Chris - my contribution was restricted to asking questions, providing Chocolate cake and drinking tea.

regards, Graham

Dave, looking at the second photo of no.10995 I think that the second handbrake shaft has the far-side "V" support reversed compared to the near-side shaft support - ie. an indication that in building this wagon the four "V" supports for the two handbrake lever shafts were all of the same hand (all the same forging), the two inner supports being reversed so as to simplify mounting those supports from the "long middle bearers".

regards, Graham

1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

I'm off to rewrite the gwr.org page (again)...

With due respect - being as you are the author of the relevant page - I suggest that you delay for just a while so that I can ask Chris Brown about the appropriate Wagon Register entries.  The wagon in the photograph - which was submitted to the brake trials according to the photograph album in Kew - is shown in the Wagon Register as having "Right-hand new lever" brakes; looking through the entries for other four plank wagons which were built at about the same time as no.10995 the brake arrangements appear to be:-

* double brake with single handbrake lever;

* "new lever" - which we think is probably DC1;

* "right hand new lever" - which is DC1X on the basis of the evidence of the photographs posted here.

If our interpretations of the register entries are correct then no.10995 is not unique amongst the four plank wagons.

Dave asked me about copyright of the two photos - given that the date has to be inn the Edwardian era then copyright has expired.  John Lewis supplied copies of his photographs to me without caveat so I thnk that Russ can include the GWR photos in GWR.org as long as the source is acknowledged with use under "fair play" guidelines.

regards, Graham

Did we not provide the photo of the other side of this wagon?  You know, the photo which gives the lie to this being a straight DC1 brake arrangement?

Neat and tidy build, regards, Graham

Might you be referencing a BBC Radio 2 program from the late 1960s by the title of "Thanks for the Memory" with Hubert Gregg?

9 hours ago, Chrisbr said:

@wenlock, I have experimented with etched 7mm wagon cast number plates, see below. Numbers to suit wagon lot.....

 

Chris

That looks rather desirable, just need to decide which wagons got such plates....

On the basis of what has been written here I have approached David White for a description of the service to include in the S7 Group Newsletter (in my capacity as Trade Liaison Officer for the S7 Group).  David's initial response is along the lines of "Hold your horses...  work in progress...  GWR four wheel coaches are initial subjects...".  My take on David's reply is that, collectively, we may have jumped the gun.

regards, Graham

I think that RCTS "Locos of the GWR, Part 5" gives the date of initial conversion from saddle to pannier tank and the date that an engine received a change of boiler class.  The boilers are described in the appendix to the part and I recollect that one can determine round top or belpaire boiler from the data.

Although more than 30 years ago I did go through the boiler records, at Kew, to see which boilers were used on the 2021s and I think that I got firebox details from the records.

21 minutes ago, wenlock said:

 

Im sure number 2112 would be delighted to chuff up and down either!

Bit of a quandary here, our version of S&W history uses a track gauge of 33mm whilst Ian's fourth version of Knockley Gate continues in the tradition of 32mm gauge - now is that standard gauge and "broad gauge" or standard gauge and "narrow gauge"?

Come March 2020 you might wish to beware of a Red-Hat trying to borrow a 2021 class for a mineral working on an Edwardian version of the S&W between Lower Forge and Upper Forge.  Or Mr Lightmoor looking for some appropriate motive power for his forthcoming Knockley Gate version 4.

Given the number of your engine, where did you get a backhead for an engine with a Belpaire boiler?

regards, Graham

We have built a couple of these bogies in the past and we struggled with folding the diagonals - how did you hold the etch to get the diagonals folded neatly at 90 degree angle?

Popcorn, candyfloss and peanuts beside the soft and comfy chair, I shall enjoy seeing how you progress this model in preparation for Basingstoke 2020.

With interior lighting perhaps?

regards, Graham

8 minutes ago, gwrrob said:

... to seeing this in the flesh in May.

OOooh, a chance to see this layout for real?  Please tell us all when and where!

regards, Graham

Good clean work with a nice flow through the S&C stuff.

I note that you have changed the title from 88" to 109"...  I think that this model is of the 107" prototype.  Whilst there were 88" versions of the SI, following the 80" and 86" versions, I believe that a LWB 109" vehicle was introduced with the SII models.

B10 seems an odd configuration given that C8 is a natural...  might C10 be a cleaner arrangement?

What a neat and tidy solution to a difficult problem, thank you for sharing.

If the wheels do not run true then please speak to David White - he is always ready to help when a Slater's product does not satisfy.

There is always an anticipation of delights to come when I see a Wenlock entry is the "recent blogs" section of the home page and this blogette is as welcome as all of those which have gone before.

Not a lot...

Sorry, that catchphrase was not heard in Buggleskelly recently, nor in Freshwater nor in Canford.

Can you see more if the room is illuminated?

 Here I've put a box van up against the plywood to measure the loading gauge:

So you have got a 7mm SR even plank van to go with the pug shown in an earlier installment...  great progress on your journey to the bigger world.

Nice PW there, good to see that you have gone for S7 standards now that you have moved up from P4 .

No matter which way you turn the engine...  a 7mm pug does not run on 4mm PW.

Magnets?

The sleepers in the third photo look rather old and silvery....  nice.

How did you achieve the colouring?

Wherever possible I put a thread on the end of the buffer ram, most often 12BA or occasionally 10BA.  I acknowledge that in some circumstances there may be a need to out a 10BA thread on the ram and have room for only a 12BA nut, drill and tap the 12BA nut for a 10BA thread...

P4 to 7mm scale?  A P4 convert to 7mm scale has accepted the finescale ethos and hence might wish to adopt S7 (which is more than just track, the relationship of wheels to frames and footplate is as important).

Drop a PM if you wish to talk S7 in any aspect of building or supplies or what the S7 Group has to offer you.

regards, Graham